Labour criticises use of Glasgow council £23m fund for ‘essential’ repairs

They have said the £1 million per ward scheme is being used for work which the council has an “obligation” to carry out.

Councillor Jill Brown, a Labour councillor for Partick East/Kelvindale, said the list of projects “proposed by the administration” not only “lacked any imagination but on a number of occasions covers repairs which the administration has a statutory obligation to make.”

She added the funding should not be used to “prop up budgets elsewhere in the council”.

However, Councillor Ruairi Kelly, SNP, said the options had been “produced by officers” to give an idea of “the sort of works that could be carried out.”

“Labour is fully aware of this,” he said.

Councillor Kelly added: “They were part of discussions on the matter last week. The fact their councillors would rather undermine the biggest ever devolution of budgets in Glasgow than engage with their communities speaks volumes.”

A £23 million neighbourhood infrastructure investment fund was part of this year’s council budget, with papers stating options would be presented to area partnerships.

Budget papers said: “Examples of which could include pothole and pavement repairs, improving street lighting, new street furniture such as benches or bollards, and improved traffic signals and pedestrian crossings.”

In Partick East/Kelvindale, the suggestions presented by council officers included carriageway and footway improvements, new CCTV in a bid to tackle fly-tipping and spending over £250,000 on renewing/replacing street lighting columns. Upgrading traffic signal equipment, including for the visually impaired, at Dumbarton Road/Stewartville Street was also on the list.

Councillor Brown said: “These are not nice ‘to haves’, these are ‘must haves’. Fixing a dangerous streetlight is not an improvement, it is an obligation on the council.

“Already we are seeing essential services being sneaked onto the slate of works when the council has an existing obligation to provide these services.”

She added: “This should not be about window dressing by the administration but actually money being used to pay for more safety measures around our schools to protect children, to develop green spaces, introduce energy efficiencies or more electric car charging points, not mend dangerous potholes, which the council should be mending anyway.”

Councillor Lilith Johnstone, Councillor Brown’s Labour ward colleague, said: “Since my election in May, there are a number of local issues that have come to my attention that could be solved using this fund. For example, traffic calming measures around our local schools.

“It is essential that the available money is spent addressing these specific local concerns rather than disappearing into funding the council’s statutory obligations.”

However, Councillor Kelly, the city’s convener for neighbourhood services and assets, said: “These are not, as claimed, works proposed by the administration but options produced by officers to give elected members and communities an idea of the sort of works that could be carried out and associated costs.

“Officers within the community empowerment team will be considering how best to gather the views of local communities about how and where to direct this additional spending coming to neighbourhoods.”

At a full council meeting last week, Councillor Cecilia O’Lone, Labour, asked council leader Susan Aitken, SNP, whether the programme would be stopped until “an appropriate process is in place across the city for communities to be actively involved in the decision making.”

Councillor Aitken had previously told a Langside Area Partnership meeting there was a “real problem” with the lack of consultation. “This is not communities deciding,” she said.

In response to Councillor O’Lone, the council leader said it was “not accurate” to say the investment had been stopped.

She added: “It will still be allocated in a way that represents the needs of local communities.”

At a Dennistoun Area Partnership meeting on Tuesday, a council officer said the options were “only the start.”

He added: “This is about how local people want to spend money, not a group of officers or the area partnerships in splendid isolation.”